Seriously?!?! Wow I would have decked that old guy if he tried to pull that kind of stunt on me. I guess freedom and free speech is only meant for rethugs and teabaggers...this ranks up there with that story the other day about the Romney Campaign bus going around and honking the horn at Obama's rallies.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 4):Caliatenza is trying to assign blame to Mitt Romney for the behavior of one of his supporters that was out of line.

I remember back in the 08 campaign, McCain actually tried to calm this sort of thing down. I know Palin was out there getting everyone riled up, but still. In addition, what was up with the Romney Campaign Bus being driven around with its horn blaring at one of the Obama rallies, surely Romney must have known about that.

I very much doubt he knew this sort of stuff was going on. If Romney had to say something every time one of his supporters did something out of line, he'd have no time for anything else, and the same goes for Obama. If there's some sort of movement to do stuff, or when he's actually present at the time (witness McCain at one of his town halls in '08), then you can justify blaming him for not saying something. But since he wasn't around for this one, this is just one idiot Romney supporter physically assaulting someone else, for which he deserves public ridicule and should serve jail time. But you can't hold it against the candidate.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 10):And let's not forget people vandalizing cars with Obama stickers on them. So much for freedom of speech!

After the 2004 election many cars were keyed here in Seattle that had Bush/Cheney bumper stickers.... Someone in my neighborhood had 2 tires spiked for having a W sign on their car. I wouldn't say that kind of behavior is limited to conservatives Seb.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 12):After the 2004 election many cars were keyed here in Seattle that had Bush/Cheney bumper stickers.... Someone in my neighborhood had 2 tires spiked for having a W sign on their car. I wouldn't say that kind of behavior is limited to conservatives Seb.

I agree, this behavior goes on on both sides. And it's wrong on either side.

Here's the thing though. I listen to Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, on a daily basis. And all you hear about from those big three are the bad things that Obama supporters do, or liberals do, and so on and so forth, you never hear about stuff like this handkerchief stuffer...because there's an agenda here to make the Republicans look like the "good guys".

Now, that wouldn't be a problem when you take into account the bias these hosts have, but the problem is that millions of their listeners do NOT take into account the host's political bias, and instead trust that these guys are telling them the truth, unlike the "liberal media". But they're not, they are doing the exact same thing they accuse television networks of doing...skewing the news to suit their political bias. These hosts have enourmous numbers of listeners and followers who are being misled to see Obama supporters as monstersa and conservatives as the answer to restore balance to the country.

Meanwhile, on the "liberal media", CNN, I see BOTH sides being reported on, pretty equally. MSNBC is obviously biased left, Fox is obviously biased right. So I rely on CNN. And what the conservative talk show hosts have managed to accomplish is that even networks that report equally on both sides of the political fence are labeled liberal for having any pro-democratic reporting at all.

In short, I feel the OP posted this to "fight back". Sometimes it gets lonely being a progressive in a conservative country.

And so the extraordinarily predictable slanging matches between Republican and Democrat supporters continues......I think we can probably just agree that anyone who goes around intimidating others or threatening others or deliberately trying to piss everyone off is simply a jerk, regardless of who they claim to support.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 19):I think we can probably just agree that anyone who goes around intimidating others or threatening others or deliberately trying to piss everyone off is simply a jerk, regardless of who they claim to support.

lol exactly. I could ruin a candidate's day by doing something crazy stupid and saying I endorse them.

"I love to drown kittens. Go Nader!" Will I make the news now? Should be protest Nader?

Which side is worse? WHO CARES? There is no way to know. I hate how we focus on how much the "other side is worse" and not how "our side can be better." It seems acceptable behavior is being as bad as the other side + 1 and not adhering to any moral standard.

Quoting Aloha717200 (Reply 13):In short, I feel the OP posted this to "fight back". Sometimes it gets lonely being a progressive in a conservative country.

i was just posting this to show how the republicans, or at least some republicans, who are always up in arms about rights being taken away, about free speech being supressed by the "bad liberals" or whatever, in fact dont mind shutting up people who dont agree with them. Granted, here its just one old crazy guy, but still. I wouldnt call myself a progressive really..i am more of a centrist/moderate. I will vote for a Republican, granted if their platform agrees with me. Sadly, the GOP has being going down the toilet for years now.

But Democrats are testing the outer limits of that understanding with a practice that raises questions about when campaign tracking becomes something more like stalking.

While most serious campaigns on both sides use campaign trackers — staffers whose job is to record on video every public appearance and statement by an opponent — House Democrats are taking it to another level. They’re now recording video of the homes of GOP congressmen and candidates and posting the raw footage on the Internet for all to see.

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill

That kind of shit is normal on both sides - not going to defend Romney but who cares it wasn't that harmful. He is just a senile old geezer that is clueless and probably only on social security but supports Romney because his pastor supports him and Romney will personally thank him when he cuts his social security.

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 22):and probably only on social security but supports Romney because his pastor supports

Now wait a minute. How do you arrive at this? You just made a discriminatory remark based on the man's age. All we know is that he is a Romney supporter that acted foolishly and happens to be elderly. From that, you somehow assume that he is a Bible-thumper on social security. On top of that, you make the ridiculous claim that Romney would gut social security if elected President.
Here is a comment by Mitt Romney regarding social security;

“Now, my own view is, that we have to make it very, very clear that Social Security is a responsibility of the federal government, not the state governments, that we're going to have one plan, and we're going to make sure that it's fiscally sound and stable.

And I'm absolutely committed to keeping Social Security working. I put in my book that I wrote a couple of years ago a plan for how we can do that and to make sure Social Security stable not just for the next 25 years, but for the next 75.”

- Mitt Romney, September 22, 2011

Does THAT sound like someone who wants to cut social security? In fact, it was President Obama that was the ONLY President to threaten to withhold social security checks during last years budget talks. He played the elderly card.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 23):“Now, my own view is, that we have to make it very, very clear that Social Security is a responsibility of the federal government, not the state governments, that we're going to have one plan, and we're going to make sure that it's fiscally sound and stable.

Well now he sounds like a liberal by promoting a large federal government instead of state government.

Both sides are scumbags. Both sides have supporters who are scumbags. Until the American public REALLY puts up their arms and makes a move to punish terrible politicians and their supporters, it will keep going. So...it will keep going for a while.

Quoting sw733 (Reply 26):Both sides are scumbags. Both sides have supporters who are scumbags. Until the American public REALLY puts up their arms and makes a move to punish terrible politicians and their supporters, it will keep going. So...it will keep going for a while.

This is why I don't vote for EITHER party. As long as we have this two party duopoly we are going to always have scumbags running this country. Romney is a scumbag, Obama is a scumbag, Bush was a scumbag and so on. This is why the Libertarian or another party needs to really make a move - this year really is a loser vs. loser, vote for the lessor of two evils, you are still voting for evil type year.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 23):Now wait a minute. How do you arrive at this? You just made a discriminatory remark based on the man's age. All we know is that he is a Romney supporter that acted foolishly and happens to be elderly. From that, you somehow assume that he is a Bible-thumper on social security. On top of that, you make the ridiculous claim that Romney would gut social security if elected President.
Here is a comment by Mitt Romney regarding social security;

Did you want me to say he is in the top 1% that people would say Romney is going to help out? He is 70+ years old the article said, so it is pretty obvious he is collecting social security unless he is uber rich - so likely conclusion drawn there he is collecting.

Next conclusion - he is a bible thumper. Why do many non wealthy senior citizens vote Republican? They are in it for the moral issues - Republicans are typically against Abortion, gay marriage, porn, etc appeal to the God and Country angle. There is a good chance that this guy attends church every sunday, reads the bible and is not appaled that Romney is a Mormon because Obama is a Muslim. Romney will sucker him and his kind in by promising an end to abortion, no gay marriage etc.

I wish that we could hear this old geezer speak and know more about him though.

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 28):so it is pretty obvious he is collecting social security unless he is uber rich - so likely conclusion drawn there he is collecting.

I have no idea, nor care about his source of income. He acted out of line and that was wrong.

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 28):Next conclusion - he is a bible thumper. Why do many non wealthy senior citizens vote Republican? They are in it for the moral issues - Republicans are typically against Abortion, gay marriage, porn, etc appeal to the God and Country angle. There is a good chance that this guy attends church every sunday, reads the bible and is.....

This has got to be some of the craziest stuff I've read in the non-aviation forums. Romney's support comes from a much more diverse background than you think. Besides, none of the things you assume about this man is illegal. He acted out of line and that's it. To go on an make all sorts of assumptions about his religious beliefs is utterly ridiculous.

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 25):Well now he sounds like a liberal by promoting a large federal government instead of state government.

...which makes your social security assumption of this man and Mitt Romney even more out of place. Romney isn't going to gut social security and we don't even know if this supporter collects S.S. and it really doesn't matter or have anything to do with the discussion.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 29):This has got to be some of the craziest stuff I've read in the non-aviation forums. Romney's support comes from a much more diverse background than you think. Besides, none of the things you assume about this man is illegal. He acted out of line and that's it. To go on an make all sorts of assumptions about his religious beliefs is utterly ridiculous.

What is the chance that this guy is a Muslim or a Buddhist or an Atheist? very little.